It is hard to imagine how an alleged “God the Son” could have said in Psalm 22:1, “My God, My God, why have you forsaken me?” And how a pre-incarnate “God the Son” could have said in Psalm 22:10, “… since my mother bore me, you have been my God”. Since the one whose hands and feet were pierced in Psalm 22:16 has a God (“Jesus said to her, ‘Stop clinging to Me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father; but go to My brethren and say to them, I ascend to My Father and your Father, and My God and your God.'" – John 20:17), we know that these utterances could not have actually been spoken by the Messiah before his birth in Bethlehem. This explains why Heb. 1:6 says, “when He brings the firstborn into the world, He said, ‘Let all of the angels of God worship him’”. The human child born and son given is called “the firstborn among many brethren” just as God’s elect were born in God’s expressed thought (John 1:1 “in the beginning was the word” - in the Father’s uttered mind and plan) after the firstborn before the actual creation ever took place (Rom. 8:29; Col. 1:15; Rev. 3:14; Prov. 8:22-26). Jesus was therefore born in God’s prophetic utterance before he was actually born and slain (Col. 1:15 – “the firstborn of all creation”; Rev. 13:8 – “the lamb slain from the creation of the world”).
If the angels of God were already worshipping the Son of God as a Son throughout eternity past, then why did God command the angels to worship the Son when He said, “Let all of the angels of God worship him?” The only sensible answer is that the angels of God did not worship the Son as a Son until he was actually born into the world; because the Son did not exist as a Son until he was conceived within the virgin. This explains why God had to tell the angels to worship the newly created child born and son given (Isaiah 9:6) when he was conceived and formed within the virgin.
While we emphasize the true humanity of Christ as the Son of the living God, we must also understand that He who became the child born and son given pre-existed his birth as the “Mighty God” and “Everlasting Father” (Isaiah 9:6) before He became the Son by the Holy Spirit of God descended upon the virgin (Luke 1:35) to become a true man as the Christ child. This explains why Jesus was able to say to the Pharisees, “before Abraham was, I AM” (John 8:58) and this is why Hebrews 3:3-4 and Hebrews 1:10 (Hebrews 1:10 cites Psalm 102:25, "Of old You founded the earth, And the heavens are the work of Your hands.”) identify Jesus as Yahweh the creator before also becoming a son through the virgin. For it is scripturally untenable for the Father to have created all things by the work of His hands (Isaiah 64:8, “You are our Father, we are the clay, You are our Potter, and we are all the work of Your hands.”) while another alleged God Person, who is not the Father, created all things as another divine person as the Father’s agent in creation.
New Testament Scripture often cites the Hebrew Scriptures to prove that the Son could not have spoken as a Son before his supernatural conception and birth in Bethlehem. For God the Father prophetically said to his future Son in Psalm 2:7, “You are my Son, THIS DAY have I BEGOTTEN YOU” which is cited in Hebrews 1:5 to show that the Father would beget His future Son on the day that Christ was born. When we consider the fact that Hebrews 1:5 cites Psalm 2:7 which says, “this day have I begotten you,” by applying it to 2 Samuel 7:14 in which God the Father said, “I will be to him a Father and he will be to Me a son,” we know that the Son could not have always been a begotten Son without a beginning because the Son was actually born on a specific day.
Hebrews 1:5 says, “For to which of the angels did He ever say, ‘you are My Son, this day have I begotten you’ (a direct quote from Psalm 2:7)? And again, ‘I will be to him a Father and he will be to Me a son’ (a direct quote from 2 Samuel 7:14)?’” Notice how the inspired author of Hebrews connected Psalm 2:7 with the Messiah birth, “You are My son, this day have I begotten you” by writing, “And again” in the same verse to refer to the Father and Son relationship beginning to exist in the prophetic future: “I will be to him a Father and he will be to Me a son”. Hence, Trinitarian theologians who have followed Augustine’s claim that the Son was “eternally begotten” on an “eternal day” have twisted the clear meaning of Psalm 2:7 and Hebrews 1:5 (Augustine of Hippo wrote in “The Confession” – Book 11 “Your years are one day, and your day is not daily, but today; because Your today yields not with tomorrow, for neither does it follow yesterday. Your today is eternity; therefore You begot the Co-eternal, to whom You said, ‘This day have I begotten You.’”). Other Trinitarian theologians have tried to fit Christ’s birth into his resurrection day (A Definitive Look At Oneness Theology, 4th Edition, Edward Dalcour, page 149) in order to explain away the scriptural evidence which proves that Christ as a Son had to have had a beginning by his virgin conception and begetting. Therefore, Trinitarian theologians have greatly erred by twisting the clear meaning of the word of God as there is no way to circumvent the fact that the Father and Son relationship only occurred after his virgin conception and birth in Bethlehem.
If Hebrews 1:5 did not cite 2 Samuel 7:14 as a prophecy about Jesus, then Trinitarians could claim that 2 Samuel 7:14 was only addressing Solomon and not Christ. However, Hebrews 1:5 clearly proves that the Father and Son relationship could not have occurred throughout eternity past.
2 Samuel 7:14 states that God the Father said, “I will be to Him a Father and he will be to me a son.”
Hebrews 1:5 cites 2 Samuel 7:14 as, “I will be to him a Father and he will be to me a son”. Wherefore, God the Father spoke prophetically about Solomon before he was physically born as a type of the future “child born” and “son” that would be given in the prophetic future. God clearly spoke of His future relationship with His Son when He said, “I will be to him a Father and he will be to Me a Son”. These exact words also appear in Hebrews 1:5 to show that Jesus Christ is that future Son who would have a Father. Therefore, scripture itself testifies that the Father and Son relationship could not have begun until after the incarnation had taken place.
In like manner, Psalm 110:1 says, “Yahweh (YHWH) said to my Lord (adon = a human lord), sit at my right hand until I make your enemies a footstool for your feet” which is quoted in Matthew 22:44 to prove that God the Father already prophetically spoke these words to His future child born and son given (Romans 4:17 – God “calls the things which be not as though they were”) in His own “expressed thought” (Logos – John 1:1 = the divine utterances of the Father) before God the Father actually spoke these words at the ascension of Christ into heaven (Acts 2:33-35).
Scholars have noted that many Messianic prophecies were given with a twofold application. For example, 2 Samuel 7:14 at first appears only to reference Solomon, but Hebrews 1:5 proves that it also refers to Christ.
2 Samuel 7:14 records what God prophetically said about Solomon, “I will be to him a Father, and he will be to Me a son.”
But Hebrews 1:5 says that God the Father also referenced the future Sonship of Christ Jesus when He said, “I will be to him a Father, and he will be to me a son”.
In like manner, Psalm 8:5-6 appears to reference mankind in general, “What is man that you are mindful of him, or the son of man that you visit him? You crowned him with glory and honour and appointed him over the works of Your hands”. But Hebrews 2:6-7 cites Psalm 8:5-6 to show that this passage also applies to Jesus Christ.
“What is man that you are mindful of him, or the Son of Man that you visit him. You have made him a little lower than the angels; You crowned him with glory and honour and set him over the works of Your hands.” Hebrews 2:6-7
Hebrews 2:9 clearly informs us that Psalm 8:5-6 is also a Messianic prophecy about Jesus,
“But we do see him who was made a little lower than the angels, namely, Jesus.”
Here we can clearly see that the Son as the Son never created anything (as the Father alone is the creator - Isaiah 64:8; Isaiah 44:24; Mal. 2:10) because the Son is the man Christ Jesus who was foreknown and foreordained to be set over the works of the Father’s hands before the physical creation ever took place (1 Peter 1:20; Ephes. 1:4-5; Rev. 3:14). Hence, God prophetically spoke of the future child born and son given as if he was already set over the works of the Father’s hands before the Son would actually be set over the works of the Father’s hands at his second coming. For God the Father thinks and speaks by calling “the things which be not as though they were (Romans 4:17).” Thus, it is the miraculous nature of God to be able to speak of things which do not yet exist as if they already existed (Daniel 7:14 says, “to him was given dominion and glory … that all … languages might serve him”, but Rev. 19:15 shows that this dominion will not actually given until Christ’s second coming, “he will rule them with a rod of iron”). Therefore we know that Christ as a child born and son given did not exist to literally act or speak within the Hebrew Scriptures.
In like manner, Psalm chapter twenty two clearly refers to both King David and Christ. Although King David felt God forsaken in his prayers, we find that David also prophesied about Christ on the cross in Psalm 22:1 when he wrote, “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me.” For Jesus actually prayed these same words on the cross to bring about their true fulfilment as recorded in Matthew 27:46. Therefore we know that the Son as the Son did not actually speak as a living Messiah in the Hebrew Scriptures before his actual birth in Bethlehem.
No passage of Hebrew Scripture ever shows an alleged loving relationship between the Father and Son literally occurring because all scriptures in the Hebrew Bible that show the Messiah acting or speaking were written prophetically of the future child born and son given. Jesus prayed to his Father in John 17:24, “for You loved me before the foundation of the earth,” but no passage ever says that the Son could ever love his Father back before the incarnation in either the Old or the New Testaments. Therefore, no Trinitarian can find a single scripture from Genesis to Malachi to show that the Father and Son had an actual relationship before Christ’s virgin conception and birth.
No Trinitarian theologian or apologist has ever been able to cite a single example in which the Son as the Son actually spoke as an alleged pre-incarnate Messiah in the Hebrew Scriptures. Nor can anyone submit a single example to show that the Father and Son relationship pre-existed the Father and Son relationship which began on earth after the Son was born in Bethlehem. For the scriptures always speaks of God Father prophetically speaking too, and loving His Son in prophetic anticipation of the future child that would be born and the future Son that would be given (Isaiah 9:6). Thus, inspired scripture proves that the Son as the Son was only able to speak as “the man Christ Jesus” who was “granted … a life in himself” (John 5:26) by his Father rather than always having a timeless life in himself before his birth.